Cheering for a Team No Longer on the Field: Rhetoric and Reality in American Welfare History

By Levine, Daniel | Journal of Economic Issues, September 2001 | Go to article overview

Cheering for a Team No Longer on the Field: Rhetoric and Reality in American Welfare History


Levine, Daniel, Journal of Economic Issues


In an article in this journal in June 1998, William S. Kern argued that the welfare "reform" act of 1996, formally the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunities Reconciliation Act, was in essence a return to the political economy of Poor Law Reform Act in Great Britain in 1834. Professor Kern asserted that an understanding of both acts means an understanding of the attitudes toward poverty of classical economists, particularly Thomas Malthus. [1] Certainly that article is correct as far as it goes. I would argue that a longer view gives a more differentiated, more optimistic--Kern might say a naively optimistic--conclusion.

As the millennium turned, we were all inundated with summations of this or that, lists of the "greatest" or the "most influential," or whatever. We can now also look back to see developments of the welfare state in the United States during the entire century. Is the era of big government really over? What we find, in fact, is that in spite of a drumbeat of rejection, the United States is, to a considerable degree, a welfare state, not so terribly different from those of Europe. Moreover, a welfare ideology is so deeply woven into the institutional, economic, intellectual, and political fabric of the United States that even the most individualistically minded cannot extract it, and American individualism, while still strong in some areas, is in relation to social welfare far more potent rhetorically than it is in fact.

Damning the welfare state is a staple in American politics, from Barry Goldwater in 1960 to talk radio every day. And we are not talking about fringe figures on the extremes of American politics, but a portion of the mainstream, representing many groups and not only within one political party. The question is whether they are representing anything more than nostalgia, whether they are cheering for a team that is not even on the field any more. Perhaps the very vehemence of the rhetoric is evidence that it is conscious of its own futility.

American rhetoric and reality at the beginning of the twentieth century--and before--was, as Kern implied, established by the English Poor Law Report of 1834. The "principles of '34" asserted that poor relief in general was a bad thing, for if people found that they could live without working they would do so and would be "pauperized." That word was not an economic measure, but a moral one: they would lose their character and self-respect. Therefore "all relief whatever to able-bodied persons or to their families, otherwise than in well regulated workhouses...shall be declared unlawful and shall cease." The Poor Law Commissioners of 1834 assumed that poverty was simply unwillingness to work; that charity created pauperism, not the reverse. [2]

These principles had greater force in the United States, both as rhetoric and reality, than they did in their country of origin. In the United States, the assumption of prosperity was so widely accepted that it almost did not need articulation. This assumption meant that reformers had to assert again and again that there was poverty--Look at it! Here it is!--a task that English or continental reformers did not face. And that assertion had to precede any discussion of what, if anything, should be done about it.

As in England, the major organized guardians of the "principles of '34" in the United States were the Charity Organization Societies. Entirely voluntary organizations, self-appointed, they regarded themselves as expert specialists. As doctors were specialists in their sort of illness, the members of the Charity Organization Societies were, they thought, specialists in their sort: poverty and charity. In the normal course of their work, they collected large amounts of data on the poor and seekers after charity. Their rigid defense of principle began to weaken during and after the depression of 1893-96.

For example, in 1894, at the lowest point in the depression, Amos G.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Cheering for a Team No Longer on the Field: Rhetoric and Reality in American Welfare History
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.